Porting requires you to have the ability to read and understand the error messages, warnings, and information messages produced. It is not clear you've taken the step of looking at the error messages, since you have not posted regarding any of them.

The very first error in your log fragment is:

Code:

htscharset.c:355:19: error: iconv.h: No such file or directory

It appears that iconv header files are needed to successfully compile htscharset.c. The iconv library (libiconv package) appears to be a dependency, as it includes these header files. Do you have the libiconv package installed? If so, the Makefiles, autoconfig, or libtool do not know where to find the header files. The -L option of pkg_info(1) will show you where they actually are.

If you do not have libiconv installed, you have a dependency you were unaware of. Install the libiconv package.

According to the output from the ./configure step, iconv is not necessary. I believe that must be incorrect.

Once you have your iconv problem resolved, re-run your build. If it is unsuccessful, read the first error message, and see if you can determine what it means.

Last edited by jggimi; 3rd September 2012 at 11:32 PM.
Reason: clarity

daemonfowl, posting only the output from pkg_info(1) did not answer my questions, or tell me anything about a change in status for your problem, if any.

I'll restate my questions, to try to obtain more information from you about your problem and its current status, and at the same time, try to provide possible guidance for all eventualities, since your problem state is unknown.

Please reply with YES or NO to each question.

Was libiconv already installed before running the ./configure and make with the results you posted in this thread?

If the answer to Question 1. was NO, now that you have installed libiconv, was the iconv problem resolved?

If your answer to Question 1 was YES, or if the answers to both Question 1. and 2. were NO:

Are you able to determine which of the libiconv files are the header files?

If the answer to Question a. is YES, do you know how to tell your httrack building tools where to find them, or can you copy them to a place where the building tools will find them?

If the answer to Question a. is YES and the answer to Question b. is NO, you should contact the httrack developers for assistance.

If the answer to Question a. is NO, you will need to do basic research on header files so that you can recognize them by name and by directory hierarchy.

I don't know this application at all. But from what you've posted here

Their configure tool does not find iconv, even though it is installed.

Their configure tool does not perceive iconv to be a dependency, even though it apparently is one.

The httrack application developers may want to know #2. They may see #1 as your responsibility, as you are attempting to port their application to an operating system they do not support.

For your consideration:

I will assume that since there are header files, the program source code is written in C, and a gcc(1) or gcc-compatible compiler is used. That compiler uses the -I option to add directories to the header file search.

Perhaps the configure tool has an option to add compiler options and flags? These configure tools are usually shell scripts. Take a look through it, and see what the tool allows you to specify.

Last edited by jggimi; 4th September 2012 at 08:30 PM.
Reason: clarity

but again : older version , httrack-3.45.1 was a success on the same box...

and libiconv is not mentioned anywhere in that fragment. Different release, different requirements.

Porting of applications designed for other operating systems requires knowledge and skill which you currently lack. You were lucky with the prior release, and you were lucky with NetBSD, in that they ported successfully without any modifications.

More often then not, modifications are required. And you were not lucky this time.

You need the ability to read and understand the error messages, then you need knowledge of the application's particular build process in order to interpret these error messages and make appropriate remediation. You don't appear to have these capabilities.

If you want to get starting on gaining the ability to port your own software, you should read the OpenBSD Porter's Handbook. Section 3.2 is specific to the issues that arise with GNU Autoconf and its configure scripts. But the Handbook is a guide for those experienced with application building -- I mean peope who do Makefile design and deployment, not people who type "make && make install".

As you will not obtain these skills quickly, I recommend (again) that you communicate with your application developers. They will either:

support your efforts to port their application to this OS while you do not have the knowledge how to do this yourself

or they will

tell you to install their application on an OS they support.

Last edited by jggimi; 5th September 2012 at 01:10 AM.
Reason: clarity

Porting applications is possible. Thousands of applications have been ported.

However, porting is a complicated endeavor. Most applications require changes to the build/install toolchain configuration, or require code patches, or both. This means that porting usually requires the porter to have:

programming skills in the language(s) of the application

debugging skills

toolchain skills

knowledge of the application architecture differences between the application's native environment and OpenBSD.

Because of this, porting is an unsupported activity. This means that people who port applications must be self-reliant and self-sufficient, and have the skills and the knowledge to complete the task.

If you follow ports@ or misc@, you will see application porting questions arise from time to time. You will also see good answers -- when the questions are sufficiently narrow and specific that an answer can be provided. You will rarely see a (polite) answer to someone who posts a slew of error messages without having also shown a minimal level of debugging and toolchain skills.

One memorable post I recall seeing on a OpenBSD mailing list in response to query like yours was impolite, but to the point:

Quote:

You must be THIS tall to ride ---->>>>

====

I have nothing more to say about porting in general or your problem in particular.

Sir jggimi , what you're saying is definitely true .. I started the thread because I've been using httrack since OpenBSD 5.0 through 5.1 flawlessly until recent -current upgrade .. as for porting , that's something I'd aspire to , but it's not my current preoccupation as I lack basic skills ..
To the guy with the phallocentric phrase : how tall would it take to 'dive' into 'python' ??
I've read something about Freudian symbology and what phallic usage might be suggestive of .. (even though I'm Jungian and never conceived of Libido as Freud did) ..
just n impression : maybe the OpenBSD/NetBSD comparison upsets my teacher .. It just happened that I need functional multilingual kde (gnome 3 experience was lame and kde on OpenBSD lacks in that keyb layout feature -empty- .. and I need to use many layouts easily .. so NetBSD as clean Unix and closest to my favotite OS comes to rescue as came once on iMac (and yes X rocks on iMac with NetBSD 6 BETA2 :-) ) ..
and I like Daemonforums for the room it gives and the chance to learn it offers .. Thank you for all assistance and for being patient with us as well ..